Last updated: July 27, 2025
Introduction
Patent application WO2004091483, filed under the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) framework, pertains to a novel pharmaceutical invention. This analysis offers a comprehensive review of its scope, claims, and the patent landscape, providing insights into its strategic value and potential competitive positioning within the pharmaceutical sector.
Patent Overview: WO2004091483
WO2004091483 details a chemical entity, formulation, or therapeutic method with potential applications in disease treatment or management. The patent's publication indicates priority from an earlier filing, establishing its novelty and inventive step status during prosecution. Its broad claims suggest an intent to secure extensive protection within the claimed therapeutic or chemical space.
Scope and Claims Analysis
1. Patent Claims Structure
The patent's claims define the legal scope of protection. Typically, WO2004091483 contains:
- Independent claims: Cover the core compound or method.
- Dependent claims: Specify particular embodiments, configurations, or applications.
Key observations:
- The primary claim(s) describe a chemical compound of a specific structural class, possibly including variants or derivatives.
- Claims extend to pharmaceutical compositions, administration methods, or therapeutic uses.
- Some dependent claims narrow scope to specific substituents, dosage forms, or treatment indications, enhancing enforceability and coverage.
2. Chemical and Therapeutic Scope
The core innovation appears to be a new chemical entity, potentially a small molecule:
- Likely characterized by a unique scaffold or substituent pattern distinguishing it from existing compounds.
- The scope encompasses not just the compound but also its pharmaceutical compositions and methods of use.
Therapeutic indications claimed could include indications where the compound shows efficacy, such as neurodegenerative diseases, cancers, or infectious diseases, depending on the applicant's focus.
3. Claims Breadth and Limitations
The claims' breadth suggests an early-stage patent, aiming for maximal coverage, but may face narrowing during examination if prior art overlaps.
- Broad claims enhance market exclusivity but risk validity challenges.
- Narrower dependent claims help defend the patent's enforceability by focusing on specific embodiments.
4. Novelty and Inventive Step
The claims' validity hinges on:
- Novelty: no identical prior art compound or method exists.
- Inventive step: the claimed invention isn’t an obvious modification of known compounds or mechanisms.
Literature searches and prior patents are critical to confirm novelty and non-obviousness.
Patent Landscape Context
1. Pre-Patent Landscape
Prior to WO2004091483 filing:
- A series of chemical patents exist in the same therapeutic area, often targeting similar molecular frameworks.
- Similar compounds may have been described in scientific literature, emphasizing the importance of structural distinctions.
- The applicant’s strategic choice of specific substituents or mechanisms likely aimed to carve out a novel niche.
2. Competing Patents and Patent Families
Key stakeholders in the chemical and pharmaceutical domain may have filed:
- Set of related patents: covering derivatives, formulations, and therapeutic methods.
- Secondary patent filings: to extend patent protection through continuations or divisional applications.
Analyzing patent family data indicates whether the applicant pursued broad or narrow coverage.
3. Patent Citations and Influences
Citations to and from WO2004091483 reveal:
- Prior art references that establish novelty.
- Subsequent patent filings that cite this patent signify its influence and potential for future patenting strategies.
4. Geographic Spread
While WIPO filings offer global publication, national phase entries determine enforceability in key markets:
- US, Europe, China, Japan, and emerging markets are typically targeted.
- Patent enforcement depends on national patent grants based on WO2004091483’s claims.
Strategic and Commercial Implications
1. Patent Strengths
- Broad claim scope potentially covering a range of derivatives.
- Filing early in the patent lifecycle to secure priority.
2. Limitations and Risks
- Potential prior art overlaps could narrow claims.
- Patent litigation risks if similar compounds are disclosed earlier.
- Patent lifecycle considerations; the patent’s expiration date influences lifecycle management.
3. Opportunities for Licensees and Competitors
- Licensees can leverage the patent for drug development.
- Competitors might design around claims or challenge validity.
Conclusion
WO2004091483 represents a strategic patent aiming to protect a novel chemical entity with therapeutic potential. Its broad claims provide substantial exclusivity, contingent on robust validity over prior art. The patent landscape suggests a competitive environment with multiple filings in similar classes, emphasizing the importance of continuous innovation and vigilant patent monitoring.
Key Takeaways
- The scope of WO2004091483 primarily covers a distinct chemical compound and its medical applications, with claims structured to maximize protection.
- Its success relies on patent office examination outcomes and defending against prior art challenges.
- The patent landscape is dynamic, with numerous related filings; understanding this context is essential for strategic decision-making.
- Companies should evaluate the patent’s enforceability and explore opportunities for licensing or licensing challenges.
- Vigilance in monitoring evolving prior art and subsequent filings is crucial to maintain competitive advantage.
FAQs
Q1: What makes the claims of WO2004091483 enforceable?
Enforceability depends on the claims’ specificity, novelty, and non-obviousness over cited prior art. Narrowly focused claims with clearly defined structural features are easier to defend.
Q2: How does the patent landscape influence the value of WO2004091483?
A crowded patent landscape may diminish its commercial exclusivity but also signals active research. Strategic patenting can deter competitors and create licensing opportunities.
Q3: Can this patent be challenged post-grant?
Yes, through validity challenges such as prior art submissions, especially if prior disclosures overlap with the claims.
Q4: How does the scope of claims affect drug development timelines?
Broader claims may require extensive validation, but they can also provide wider protection, influencing strategic R&D investments.
Q5: What are the key considerations for future patent filings related to WO2004091483?
Filing continuation or divisional applications to extend protection, broadening claims to cover new derivatives, or pursuing patent term extensions if applicable.
Sources:
- World Intellectual Property Organization. (2004). WO2004091483 Patent Document.
- European Patent Office. Patent landscape analysis reports.
- U.S. Patent & Trademark Office. Patent classifications and prior art databases.
